ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Associations of Baseline and Changes in Intrinsic Capacity With Incident Cardiovascular Disease: A Multicohort Study.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intrinsic Capacity, Genetic Susceptibility and Incident Cardiovascular Disease Among Individuals With Diabetes: A Prospective Cohort Study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- The joint association of intrinsic capacity and physical activity with cardiovascular risk in older adults: evidence from four longitudinal cohorts.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Number of natural teeth and intrinsic capacity among hospitalized older adults in China: a cross-sectional study on the role of social support.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Intrinsic capacity (IC) represents a composite measure of physical and mental capacities. However, the relationships among baseline IC status, changes in IC over time, and the risk of incident CVD remain unclear.
methodsThis multicohort study used data from 4 nationally representative aging cohorts: the CHARLS (China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study), the HRS (Health and Retirement Study), the MHAS (Mexican Health and Aging Study), and the SHARE (Survey of Health, Aging, and Retirement in Europe). Participants were aged ≥50 years. IC was assessed across 5 domains (locomotion, cognition, vitality, sensory, and psychology). Changes in IC status were categorized as robust, decline, improve, or stable impaired. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.
resultsA total of 4548 participants from CHARLS, 8420 from HRS, 8165 from MHAS, and 19 111 from SHARE were included in baseline IC status analyses. Compared with no IC decline, individuals with impairment in 2 or more domains had a significantly higher risk of incident CVD (CHARLS, HR=1.33, 95% CI: 1.12-1.58; HRS, HR=1.73, 95% CI: 1.48-2.02; MHAS, HR=1.31, 95% CI: 1.03-1.65; SHARE, HR=1.32, 95% CI: 1.19-1.46). A total of 2825 participants from CHARLS, 7981 from HRS, 6932 from MHAS, and 17 631 from SHARE were included in changes in IC status analyses. Participants with stable impaired (CHARLS, HR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.27-2.15; HRS, HR=1.57, 95% CI: 1.36-1.82; MHAS, HR=1.53, 95% CI: 1.09-2.14; SHARE, HR=1.53, 95% CI: 1.36-1.72) showed elevated CVD risks compared with the robust group.
conclusionsBaseline IC impairments and sustaining impairments are associated with higher CVD risk. Routine assessment and monitoring of IC may prevent CVD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.